Consilience: The Journal of Sustainable Development

Vol. 11, Iss. 1 (2014), Pp. 6296

Assessing Stakeholder Adaptive Capacity to Salmon

Aquaculture in Norway
Rachel Tiller
NTNU, Norway
email: rachel.tiller@svt.ntnu.no
Russell Richards
Griffith University, Australia
Hugo Salgado
Universidad de Concepcion, Chile
Hillevi Strand
NTNU, Norway
Espen Moe
NTNU, Norway
John Ellis
NTNU, Norway
Abstract
This paper explores the socio-ecological effects of increased
aquaculture/farmed fish production, around the island group of Frya in
Trndelag, Norway, as a result of new licenses accorded to the industry. This
is investigated from a stakeholder perspective by assessing the adaptive
capacity of selected stakeholder groups through workshops combining
Scenario Analysis, Systems Thinking and Bayesian Belief Network and by
developing conceptual frameworks and structural diagrams that visualize the
perceived effects of the industry on the given stakeholder system. This
adaptive capacity is critical to explore before a de facto industry expansion.
This is because context-specific adaptation policies and measures can reduce a
given stakeholder groups vulnerability to negative consequences of industry
expansion. Policy makers a priori knowledge of these variables can lessen
conflicts that may arise as a result of stakeholder discontent with top-down
approaches to fisheries management and can also bring a legitimizing aspect to
the political process leading to integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) in
the region for affected stakeholder groups, possibly lessening simmering
conflicts.

Keywords: Aquaculture, Stakeholders, Frya, Norway, Bayesian Belief

Networks, Scenarios, Coastal Management
"The present study was supported by the CINTERA project, with Project Manager Jennifer
Bailey, funded by the Research Council of Norway"

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

1. Introduction
The demand for farmed fish is strong and growing, a natural result of
some research suggesting that 2436% of wild fish stocks have collapsed
worldwide and that 6872% of global fish stocks are overexploited or collapsed
(Worm, Barbier et al. 2006, Pauly 2007, Pauly 2008, FAO Fisheries and
Aquaculture Department 2010). Capture fisheries have a strong impact on the
ecosystem in which they operate and if the regular rate of capture continues,
serious threats to global food security could be imminent given the decrease in
wild fish reserves coupled with an increased global reliance on seafood for
protein, largely driven by big emerging economies like India and China (Antunes
Zappes, da Silva et al.). For decades, global fisheries policies have mitigated
commercial fishing efforts in an attempt to reduce the amount of fishing pressure
on wild stocks. Several solutions have been suggested to stop this downward
trend of fish supply, including no-take Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and
moving from single species fisheries management to that of Ecosystem Based
Fisheries Management (EBFM) (Ray 2011). There has been, however, increased
attention on more direct adaptation possibilities in order to balance the increased
demand for seafood and declining wild supply and the necessity to find more
efficient means of food production to feed a growing population. During the last
few decades, the primary method has been by aquaculture expansion (Abdallah
and Sumaila 2007, van Vliet, Kok et al. 2010). Aquaculture already accounted for
46 percent of total global food fish supply in 2008 and is the fastest-growing
animal-food-producing sector globally, even outpacing human population growth
(FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department 2010). The per capita supply of
animal protein from aquaculture has also increased, from 0.7 kg in 1970 to 7.8 kg
in 2008, reflecting an average annual growth rate of 6.6 percent although this
growth rate is beginning to slow. This mitigation path by policy makers is still to
be considered a de facto realization that the attempts to mitigate capture fishing
efforts to reduce pressure on wild stocks is failing (Kalikoski, Quevedo Neto et
al. 2010).
Norway has seen enormous aquaculture growth since its inception and is
currently the world leader in the production and export of farmed salmon.
However, this was not always so, given that commercial fishing initially
emphasized the use of the coastal zone. Given that the Norwegian coastline is 21
000 km long, and the sea area within the datum line is 90 000 km2, the country is
a natural selection for the exploration of the adaptive capacity to an even higher
increase in production. The topography and the hydrography of the country are
much varied, altering between deep fjords and shallow sea, calm bays and areas
of rapid currents. Temperature and salinity are stable and highly suitable for coldwater fish-farming, pollution and eutrophication are restricted to few areas, and
water quality is goodall of which lays the ground work for both commercial
fisheries and the large and increasingly diversified aquaculture industry (Ervik, J.
et al. 2007). The Norwegian coast has naturally, given these benefits, always been
influenced by human activity, and has historically been of great significance for
the Norwegian society as a food source and a basis for development and
prosperity. The living coastal areas offer great opportunities, but also present
challenges unfortunately, especially with regards to the change from wild harvest
of commercial fish species to the farming thereof. This was visualized with life
on the Norwegian coast and its changes after the Second World War.

64

Consilience

Rationalization and modernization of the commercial fishing industry and
the fishing vessel-structure was characterized by conflicts and there was natural
resistance against readjustments of these fisheries in coastal communities. Prior
to this, the fishing industry had experienced great expansion and there were
dramatic increases in production of different commercial species and highly
developed fish-products, even resulting in the employment of women several
places (Christensen 2013). Increased efficiency and better technology, however,
made the fishing vessels more mobile and the total catch of some species soon
neared collapse (e.g. Norwegian herring, smelt and coastal cod, Ibid), in line with
the global experience at the time. In the coastal communities where the fisheries
earlier had an important role, new and other businesses soon took over for this
now declining industry, resulting in major conflict between the fisheries, the
government and the politicians. The process resulted in severe deconstruction of
the industry both at sea as well as on land, as measured by employment, but the
fishing fleet in and of itself - and fishing processing industry - still kept increasing
their fishing capacity. But life at the coast had nevertheless changed, as had the
coastal communities and businesses. Oil and gas extraction, aquaculture and
tourism became increasingly more important activities along the coast, resulting
in both positive and negative reactions between the groups.
In light of this, the focus of this article is on the human dimensions of
growth of the aquaculture industry, which currently represents 60% (US$ 5.4
billion) of seafood exports, and where farmed salmon represents over 80%
(850,000 tonnes) of annual aquaculture production (Fisheries-Norway 2010).
There are many interests tied to the coastal zone such as conservation interests
and recreation, to fishing, aquaculture, production of oil and gas, wind parks,
transport and tourism. This necessitates good up-to-date coastal zone plans,
especially since 276 out of 430 municipalities border directly on these coastal
waters, and as many as 80% of the Norwegian population lives less than 10 km
from the coast. As such, the following article has chosen to use as its case study
the small island community of Frya, located in the middle of Norway, about 2,5
hours from Trondheim. Here, the effects of aquaculture have been clearly visible,
and, thus, adaptation and mitigation options in light of a tenfold increase in
production are critical to investigate. This community has recently seen a positive
population growth rate of around 3% and is highly dependent upon the
aquaculture and subsidiary industries (Statistics Norway 2013), and the
stakeholders interviewed in this paper generally expressed great content with the
industry and its planned expansions and were very interested in providing their
perceptions of future scenarios in this respect. In light of this, the paper first
introduces the theories surrounding scenario developments in general, and the
methodologies used in this project to develop quantitative scenarios based on the
perceptions derived from four participatory stakeholder workshops during the
end of 2012-beginning of 2013. This is followed by a general introduction to
aquaculture and its role in society, both globally and Norway specific, after which
a thorough contextual setting in the archipelago of Frya is introduced. Finally,
the respective stakeholder groups and their scenario development sessions are
introduced, and the future political consequences of a ten-fold increase in
aquaculture production are discussed.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

2. Definitions, Theory and Methodology

In order for the reader to comprehend the arguments of this paper in
greater depth, the following section introduces some definitions of repeated
concepts throughout the paper. These are all limited descriptions that are
explored further later in the article. The first of these concepts that is repeated
throughout the article is that of a scenario. Scenario is a concept that is introduced
in the following section, and that is often brought up in the article. It entails a
series of hypothetical events that describe what could potentially happen within
our environment in the future. In order to develop these scenarios scientifically
and quantitatively, a range of methods is used in different disciplines. In our case,
we chose to use the snowball method to find stakeholders that could participate
in workshops and during this process develop scenarios for their group. The
snowball method is a method that gives you a sample of respondents through
referrals made among those that know others who have the same qualifications
that the researcher looks for. For instance, in this case, we wanted to speak with
local enthusiasts in Frya. Although there are no organisations that assemble
local enthusiasts, individuals who so self-identify may naturally interact with
others of the same category (Biernacki and Waldorf 1981). We therefore
contacted one person who had received an award for his local enthusiasm, and
used the snowball method to find more candidates like him where he made the
first calls and thereby started rolling the ball. Once we had found a group of
candidates that were a representative sample, regardless of size of the group, we
used the method of Systems Thinking to start the process towards developing the
scenarios. This method is a group conceptualization tool that has as its aim to
create a whole picture of phenomena, such as how a given group would be able
to adapt to a ten-fold increase in aquaculture production, and create a model that
represents this imagery and that catches the complexities inherent in a
community. These models in turn can then be used either as a research tool for
further exploration, or as a management tool in and of itself, to predict action of
given groups for instance (Flood 2010, BeLue, Carmack et al. 2012). In our case,
we used the software program Vensim1 specifically designed for systems thinking,
and developed by Ventana Inc., to explore the results of the systems thinking
process and develop the actual model (Helfrich and Schade 2008, Lan, Lan et al.
2013). The variable with the most in- and output arrows from the systems
thinking process is what is then usually the priority issue for the given group, like
infrastructure was for the local enthusiasts, or preservation of commercial
fisheries for that group. The group specific variables were then brought into the
Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) session, where the process towards the development
of the scenarios was continued. During the BBN session, as used in this project,
the stakeholders were helped to develop structural diagrams, which can be used
as tools for constructing coherent probabilistic representations of knowledge that
is uncertain (Henrion 2013), such as that of stakeholders. The stakeholders,
represented as experts of their groups, shared their perceptions of how a ten-fold
increase in aquaculture production could affect their priority issue, such as
income or cultural protection, to name a few. The structural diagrams are simple
models that stakeholders develop during the BB sessions, which quantify
probabilistic influences by showing how one variable affects another. These

1

Vensim.com

66

Consilience

diagrams can then result in, through the software program Netica, developed by
Norsys2, and MS excel (or equivalent), a set of conditional probability tables (CPTs).
These CPTs are the framework used in Bayesian network modeling to quantify
the scenarios that the stakeholders have developed and require each stakeholder
to populate them by assigning a probability of outcome based on their
perceptions about the future realization of each scenario. To account for multiple
stakeholder perceptions, an auxiliary expert variables (labeled stakeholder) is
included in the BBN. This auxiliary variable enables assessment at both groupand individual-level regarding the scenarios. These definitions will be often
mentioned in the rest of the article, and are key concepts for the study of
stakeholder perceptions to a future ten-fold increase in aquaculture production in
the island community of Frya in Trndelag, Norway.

2.1 Aquaculture
Aquaculture, or fish farming, is the production of aquatic organisms such
as fish, seaweeds, and mollusks, using tanks onshore and cages in coastal and
fresh waters. The early 1900s marked the beginning of aquaculture as an
industrial system that relied on regional and some international trade. By the
1970s the industry had expanded globally and has had exponential growth ever
since, with a focus on high value species with a high export demand (FAO
Fisheries and Aquaculture Department 2010). As it is practiced today, modern
farming techniques resemble any other industrial system, and contribute to
political, social and environmental challenges. These challenges generate a
considerable amount of conflict between stakeholders who are competing over
precious coastal zones. Aquaculture benefits from its similarity to agriculture in
meeting customer demand through quality, reliability, and year-round production
capacity. As demand for seafood increases worldwide, wild fish stocks have not
been able to keep pace, allowing aquaculture an opportunity into the marketplace.
In 2006, the global collapse of fisheries represented nearly one third of fished
species, trending toward further collapse if sustainable fisheries management
were not implemented (Worm, Barbier et al. 2006). Aquaculture also puts an
enormous strain on wild fisheries, though, and it is believed that 31% of the
worldwide catch of wild fish in 2005 went toward feeding fish in farms (Weible,
Pattison et al. 2010). It is furthermore estimated that by 2030, 85 million tonnes
(nearly 50%) of the global supply of seafood will come from aquaculture (FAO
Fisheries and Aquaculture Department 2010, Marine Stewardship Council 2012),
indicating an even higher strain on global wild fish for fish feed for carnivorous
species like salmon (Rosamond L. Naylor, Rebecca J. Goldburg et al. 2000). The
aquaculture industry also struggles with negative publicity such as, among others,
diseases, parasites and escapes. Diseases such as infectious salmon anemia (ISA),
parasites such as sea lice and mass escapes can have dire consequences for the
eco-system within which the farms are located, and spillover effects to the human
population as well (Costello 2009, Hansen and Onozaka 2011, Torrissen, Jones et
al. 2013). Given this information, it is going to take a coordinated effort to ensure
this industry grows in a sustainable way that prevents both negative social and
environmental effects.

2

http://www.norsys.com/netica.html

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Norway is a fishery nation with long traditions for hunting and fishing
both on the high seas and near shore, and its expansion to aquaculture was
natural given that the natural prerequisites for both commercial fisheries and
aquaculture are fortunate in Norway where the country`s long coastline includes
deep fjords, islands and sheltered coves, stretching out more than 58,133 km
(CIA 2011). As opposed to commercial fisheries, though, aquaculture along the
coastline makes it possible to harvest seafood all year independent of the fisheries
seasons. This industry has therefore become of great value and has created many
jobs along the rural areas of the Norwegian coast, in line with the political
priorities of the sitting government in Norway of keeping the lights on in the
homes of these areas (Pedersen 2006). The aquaculture industry has also been
critical in the development of spin-off industries and is an important contributor
to the supply and processing industry as well. This is of crucial importance for
the life in the coastal communities, and creates economic growth in both rural
districts as well as larger cities. Norway is currently the world leader in the
production and export of farmed salmon, and seafood is the largest industry in
Norway after gas and oil. The aquaculture industry represents 60% (US$ 5.4
billion) of seafood exports, and farmed salmon represents over 80% (850,000
tonnes) of annual aquaculture production (Fisheries-Norway 2010). In 2008, it
was estimated that 5,000 jobs were directly related to the aquaculture industry,
and 20,000 jobs indirectly (Ibid). The products from the industry currently
represents the third most important export article from Norway (after oil 40,4 %
and gas 23,4%; seafood is at 6,6%), and the export of farmed salmon and trout
has even exceeded the export value of natural caught marine species. The value
of Norwegian salmon exports in the first quarter of 2013 alone was 8,2 billion
NOK (about USD 1.4 billion), with the main export markets being France,
Poland, EU, Russia, Denmark, USA, Spain, Germany, Sweden, Great Britain and
Japan (Purcell 2007, Statistics Norway 2013).
Since industrial scale aquaculture began in Norway, the industry has
struggled with stakeholder contentment, though. One struggle has been the
competition for coastal use at the exclusion of other uses such as tourism and
open access, and another struggle has been the social and environmental impact
(Tiller, Brekken et al. 2012, Tiller, Gentry et al. 2013). Outbreaks of diseases at
salmon farms have also caused large scale environmental impacts, such as the
spread of the parasite Gyrodactylus in 1975 that devastated wild salmon
populations, the 1984 ISA outbreak that killed 80% of farmed salmon and
permanently spread to wild populations, and the bio-accumulation of antibiotics
and chemicals (FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department 2010, FAO Fisheries
and Aquaculture Department 2012). One of the reasons for the stakeholder
struggles also lies at a more cultural level, with the decline of the commercial
fisher. In the commercial fisheries, though there still represent about 5400 fishing
vessels employing a total of about 12 200 fishermen, export goods represented
only 2, 6 billion tonnes of seafood, valued at 1 billion NOK, in 2013. This is a
result of reconstruction, white fish filet plans closings and industry bankruptcy,
and has led to widespread decrease in employment in the commercial fishing
industry businesses the last 10 -12 years (Kim, Seo et al. 2012).
At the same time, the amount of migrant workers in the farmed fisheries
industries has increased dramatically, especially after the entry in 2004 of 10 new
states into the European Union. In many industries, the number of hired
workers from Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Romania, and Bulgaria

68

Consilience

1964
1968
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
2012

has ranged from a few percent in 2001 to 18 % in 2009 and in some companies,
up to 80% percent (Graham, Martin et al. 2003). Though this was likely not the
intended path of the Soria Moria declaration of the sitting Norwegian
government, where keeping the lights on in the homes along the rural coast line
was one of the election promises (Regjeringen Stoltenberg II 2005), it has
nevertheless had the desired positive effect, especially in small communities with
great natural advantages when it comes for the farming of salmon, like Frya, in
Trndelag, Norway.
In both Frya and Hitra, the neighbouring archipelago, significant
restructuring in both commercial fishing and agriculture caused a population loss
of 38% from 1964-1995 (Van auken and Fredrik Rye 2011, Statistics Norway
2013). However, with the advent of aquaculture, this trend has been dramatically
changed to a population change that has been positive since 2008, and was at
3.04% in 2013, with the current population being 4506 inhabitants (Statistics
Norway 2013). The Norwegian success story of seafood production is in many
ways also the success story of the island community. The first attempts at
reproducing salmon found in the oceans was done in Frya and Hitra in the early
1970 `s. The first experiences of salmon farming with smolt from the wild
salmon in the regional rivers were also done there, when the pioneers started
hatching eggs and creating one of the first successes in Norwegian salmon
farming history and a new era begun in Norwegian coastal industries (IMH,
2008). The salmon industry has since become an international business, and this
coastal region of Trndelag has played an important role and has had a leading
position in the development of the aquaculture
farming history in Norway. You may say that it
Frya population
was no coincidence that the salmon-adventure
started in this region given that both
changes
geographical and climate issues are ideal for
1964-2013
salmon farming here. Additionally, the pioneers
experience and knowledge obtained from the
7000
commercial fishing industry through the
6000
centuries, was of crucial importance for the
5000
success story of Frya. These fishermen tried
4000
and they failed, and did it all over again. Their
3000
work has also contributed to a significant body
2000
of aquaculture expertise in the region, and as
1000
early as 1980, the Frya High School offered a
0
genuine education in aquaculture. Today, Frya
is ranked the 5th of the 10 most successful rural
municipalities in Norway (Richardson, Bakun et
al. 2009). This means that Frya is one of the municipalities that has been
successful both in terms of industrial development and in population growth.
The archipelago of Frya has traces of human activity going all the way
back to 11 to 12,000 years ago, and there have been several Stone Age discoveries
such near the community center of Sistranda. Early ice-free coast and abundant
supply of fish and marine animals were the reasons for the very early settlements,
and the rich fisheries then provided a good basis for existence, and have at all
times since. Frya was even the most populated municipality on the Trndelag
Coast until the 1970s, after which it experienced its collapse until its recent
rebirth. Today aquaculture is the largest value creator by far on the island

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

community. Frya is one of the leading municipalities in both salmon farming (37
sites in seawater) and processing of aquaculture products. 14 of the 15 largest
companies on Frya in 2007 were either salmon farmers or other aquaculture
related industries. Value added per capita is among the highest, and on top in
Trndelag. The municipality's largest business, the salmon farming- and
processing company SalMar, completed and launched in 2011 an extensive
construction and a huge expansion of their new salmon-processing plant located
on Kverva, Frya, which is Europe's largest salmon processing plant of its kind
(Webb 2007).
This kind of incrase in production also leads with it the need for more
workers, which in the case of the salmon industry resulted in a need for foreign
immigrants. In 2013 the region had around 500 migrant workers from around 40
different nations (Dunlap 2013). The SalMar ASA Company alone employs 660
persons, 400 specifically on the Innovamar-plant on Frya, representing 25
different nationalities. In light of these challenges, the municipality of Frya has
put a lot of effort to preserve and facilitate for the working-migrants on the
island. But Frya is also facing a huge challenge when it comes to developing and
managing a multi-cultural community. The municipal report (Frya Kommune
2012) points out that there many examples of good individual efforts to create
good relationships between nationalities, but that it lacks continuity. As the
population in a few years may consist of nearly a thousand new residents as a
result of labor migration, this can no longer be ignored or taken lightly, according
to the report. These challenges are those that could seem most pressing in a
future of a tenfold increase in aquaculture production, and was what expected to
come up most often in the discussion with the stakeholder groups as a focus of
needs for the future.

2.2 Scenario Analysis

Quantitative stakeholder-driven scenarios, created in a participatory workshop
setting, are effective in assessing the effects of a ten-fold increase in aquaculture
production in a limited area. These scenarios can be both positive and negative
and are important tools for policy makers, especially when they are flexible and
can be operated by the end user after its creation. The need for such scenarios
arises due to the inability of the traditional single sector management to
effectively address the cumulative impacts of multiple stressors, resulting in
declining productivity of ocean ecosystems and escalating conflicts between user
groups (Lester, McLeod et al. 2010, Lubchenco and Sutley 2010). Understanding
stakeholders perceptions of how potential changes in management will affect
them is essential to both guide managers to identify and resolve areas of potential
conflict before the fact and to assess how stakeholder perceptions compare to
scientific analysis of impacts.
The founder of the Scenario method was Herman Kahn. The original
intentions of the storylines in the scenarios, namely the different futures the
researcher envisioned, were to be lively but realistic and attempt to draw attention
to causal relationships between actual developments and the possible
interventions policy makers or businesses could prepare for in the event of an
actualization of a given scenario (Botterhuis, van der Duin et al. 2010). The use
of the word scenario is increasingly popularized in the social sciences, with great
variability to the methods used to reach them. There is a great level of

70

Consilience

scholarship that offer typologies, methodologies and theories about the use and
interpretation of the term, as well, but the consensus appears to land on the
agreement of scenarios being hypothetical, causally coherent, internally consistent and/or
descriptive (Philip van Notten 2006), all of which are achieved by using
participatory workshop method mixes of systems thinking and Bayesian Belief
Networks.
The literature generally highlights, though, that scenarios are not
predictions (Steven P Schnaars 1987, Hugues 2000, Kristf 2006, Lena Brjeson,
Mattias Hjer et al. 2006). This is in line with the Schrdingers Cat analogy, and
admittance from the scholar that scenarios only can indicate explorations of the
future. The cat analogy, from quantum physics and applied to scenarios,
visualizes how one can never predict any one outcome with certainty; only a
certain number of possible or plausible results within a range of predetermined
levels of probability can ever be proposed. Furthermore, until the future takes
place, neither proposed results are real. The Schrdringer Cat analogy is a
thought experiment that has the participant imagine a confined space such as an
enclosed room or a closed box and in this room there are two items a cat and a
vial of poison. If the poison container is broken by the cat, or in some other
manner, the cat will die. Looking at the confined space from the outside we
therefore state that the cat is either alive or dead. However, without an actual
observation thereof, the paradox of Schrdringer Cat demonstrates that we
actually do not know whether the cat is alive or dead. The cat is therefore neither
dead nor alive, until otherwise proven (Gribbin 1984), just like the future is to a
scenario building scholar (Tiller 2010). Forecasts and scenarios can be proposed
and explored, but neither suggestion offered, whether based on linearity or
history or expert opinion is correct until it is observed at a future time.
However, it is critical to employ both quantitative and qualitative research
to get a full and nuanced picture of the ramifications of policy change. Some
sectors typically focus on variables and relationships that are more clearly
structured than others and therefore are more able to be predicted. For example,
there are standardized algorithms used in the prediction of climate indicators (e.g.
temperature, irradiance), physical processes (e.g. hydrodynamics) and
biogeochemical rates (e.g. mortality, mineralisation, solubility). These
mathematical-based models are often used for predictions and forecasting, such
as in the area of meteorology (Gould 2011). However, human interaction is
changing this in a range of areas; the human breakage of what has been named
the natural rhythm is observable in the atmosphere currently, a scenario that was
foreseen by natural scientists as early as 1910 (De Jouvenel 2000). The effect of
human interference has also been experienced in fisheries and forestry (Ostrom
2009). How people perceive the interactions that they have with natural
resources, as well as other stakeholders, has great influence on both their
behavior and the nature of the conflict. In order to account for this, policy
makers often look to identify trends, assess different possible or plausible futures,
and evaluate the information to see what changes could be critical in the future.
This envisioning of future landscapes is well within our grasp of comprehension,
even if one can never accurately foresee exact events in a case where human and
social variables are involved, given the complexities of free will and coincidences
(Slaughter 1994, Botterhuis, van der Duin et al. 2010).

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

3. Methodology
The function of the scenarios is in many cases, and in the Frya aquaculture
expansion case specifically, to aid policy makers and business owners in their
quest to evaluate and select strategies for the future by exploring all options and
being prepared for possible conflict lines. A methodological approach that helps
achieve this outcome is to involve stakeholders in developing future scenarios, or
possible images of different futures, relative to their system. In the current
project, we used the method of systems thinking to map mental models based on
the stakeholder group analysis, providing a conceptualization of the system based
on the given stakeholder group`s beliefs. This process also aids in identifying
important elements or variables within the system conceptualization that have
influence over, or are influenced by, other variables within the same system. A
benefit of using this approach is that it allows exploration of a complex system at
the local scale (in this case, stakeholders in the community of Frya, Norway)
based on the expertise of the stakeholders themselves. This process utilizes the
knowledge of the stakeholders to identify potential drivers and consequences of
offshore aquaculture to their sector.
We started the group model building experience by presenting pertinent
background information about the project, and encouraged the participants to
imagine a future where there was a ten-fold increase in aquaculture, and reflect
on how they felt this would affect them. We used this future scenario as a proxy
for eutrophication, which is the focus of the CINTERA project3. This was done
to make the imagery more relevant for the stakeholder, and to obtain more
context related answers.
The 5 workshops, which ranged in size from 10 scientists, 9 students
(future generation), 6 local enthusiasts, 6 foreign workers and 5 commercial
fishermen, were conducted during the spring of 2013. The stakeholders were
selected using the snowball method through their respective organization (the
commercial fishermen), their teachers (we were allowed to lead a class for four
hours), their supervisors (the foreign workers at the Aquaculture company), the
main local enthusiast (he knew who would be the best representatives of this
category), and through invitations to relevant research networks (the scientists).
The quality of the results sampled from these groups far outweighed their relative
small number, as is often the case in qualitative research studies where large
samples can be ineffective and do not provide the detailed and contextual
information wanted by the researcher. In a narrative analysis, which this project
included, the researched judged 15 to be the upper limit of what would provide a
holistic narrative where all participants were given ample opportunity to share.
The sample size can be as small as one or two as well, if this participant has
information that is of critical value for that given sector and advances the
research towards a specific goal (Sandelowski 1995). The participants in this
project were sought out because they were considered experts of their own
sector, and good sources of information and perceptions about the future of the
Frya community with a ten-fold increase in aquaculture production.
In order to elicit information and scenarios, the stakeholders were first
provided with contextual information regarding the project. This included being

CINTERA (A Cross-disciplinary Integrated Eco-systemic Eurtrophication Research and Management Approach) is
NFR project 21667. It started in July 2012 and will continue through June 2015.
3

72

Consilience

briefed on the project aims and, from the literature, an overview of negative and
positive issues related to aquaculture in their area or sector of concern, including
visualizing possible aquaculture nets and pens and how these would be located in
the water column (Impson 2011). The briefing was supported by projections
concerning global seafood availability, the expansion of aquaculture and
preliminary outcomes of research about eutrophication, focusing on the
implications of aquaculture expansion on the vulnerabilities of different
stakeholders in the sector which was of primary concern to them.
The system conceptualization process was initiated by presenting the
participants with seven predetermined drivers, selected by the researchers before
the workshop. These drivers were presented as variables and therefore included
multiple states or settings (e.g. if the variable is the color of a boat then potential
states could be red/blue/green etc). The selection of these drivers was based on
literature review and expert interviews. Here, drivers can influence other
variables, but are typically not affected themselves, within the stakeholders
sector and are therefore independent variables. The drivers presented to the
workshop participants were:
the quantity of farmed seafood released to the market;
the space taken up by the aquaculture industry;
the animal welfare of the farmed fish in their pens;
the waste from the farmed seafood;
traffic to and from the farm sites, both in water and on land;
industry waste such as nets, buoys, and normal trash; and
the design and construction of the nets in the area.
The participants were then asked to nominate additional variables (within
the context of their sector) that they believed would be influenced, either directly
or indirectly (via other variables), by the driver variables. Examples of this
process might include themes such as whether the availability of fishing grounds
would affect their income, or how aquaculture pens drifting off course due to
weather would affect them. This exploration then led to identification of
additional variables that represented possible management responses that could
be used to mitigate any negative impacts of offshore aquaculture on this specific
sector. The variables identified by the stakeholders through this process were
recorded on a large white board using colored post-it notes (example Figure 1).
The workshop participants were then prompted by the researcher (workshop
facilitator) to identify connections between these variables in the form of
directional associations; for example, such connections could highlight that
employment in the fisheries sector is affected by the area taken up by the
Aquaculture industry, or if the amount of fish that an aquaculture venture
released to the market directly affected the landing prices for a given wild fish
stock from the capture industry.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Figure 1: Conceptual Diagram created with post-it notes on the board. The pink
notes are the 7 drivers. At the same time as the lead researcher is working on
these on the board, another researcher is working on Vensim, translating these
notes to a computer model.
The result of this variable identification and interconnection process,
which took about two hours, was a system conceptualization or group mental
model that represented how this particular group of workshop participants
(example Figure 2) collectively viewed the causal pathways between variables, and
how they identified by closer inspection where possible conflict points could be
located.

74

Consilience

Plant design

Net Construction

Production
Waste

Area

safety for workers

Protected area

Shift in nitrate

land based cabin owners

activities
bad construction can Lower level food
food producers
web affected
lead to escapes
aestetics

Feed Waste

Traffic

occupy area

use of coastal zone

submerged will be
Fisherman affected
collection of waste
positive
More efficient energy
consumption

Animal
Welfare

Work

Need for Protein

Consumption in the
World

infrastructure could
be improved

ship traffic

Tunnels and roads

kayakers
local harbor

Tourism

Site specific
Eutrophication

energy producers

negative for norwegian

companies giving advantages to
international companies

water pollution

niches for other

species

use same areas

environmentalists
sad

enviromentalists
happy

use group conflicts

happy with more fish in

protected areas

negative

antifouling / toxic to
housing price
reduce algae
sellers happy
good for industry

Could be positive if food

web change to support
more fish

positive for
community
better education

city development
high education
jobs

Knowledge can be
exported

Responsability to make
aquaculture sustainable

Reduction in fish
availability for fishmeal

Tourist fishermen

employment
increase

negative effect on ecosystem

What are the

consecuences of
other sources?

Traffic in-out to
aquaculture facilities

New jobs in the

fishing industry

good for the

economy

change from fishmeal

to soymeal
mackerel used for
human consumption
fish meal
producers

outsiders

increase
immigration

local

production
workers

use krill instead of fishmeal,

opportunities for local
industry

food efficiency

energy intensive
crops (negative)

anchoveta used for

human consumption

Norwegian

foreigners

goes to better cities not

to local community

Type of feed used

(animal/vegetal)

competing markets, bigger

consumer of fishmeal is poultry
not aquaculture

need of new sources of

food for salmon aquaculture
New areas for
scientists

attract norwegian

Figure 2: Vensim model of Conceptual diagram created in Figure 1. This example

is from the stakeholder workshop for Scientists. This model is presented to the
participants during the break to illustrate which variables the program finds to
have the highest priority for the group. The group then discusses whether it
agrees with this or if they want a different version for the BBN session.
This process was followed by identification of some priority issue, which
is the issue that most of the participants in each workshop felt was most
important (and often identified through what had the most arrows going in or
out in the Systems Thinking part of the workshop figure 2) in the
conceptualization process for further exploration in the modelling of the
Bayesian Belief Networks (BBN). BBN modelling is a methodology that is well
suited to representing causal relationships between variables4 in the context of
variability, uncertainty and subjectivity. They have demonstrated ability in
utilising subjective expert opinions to both derive the structure of, and variables
within, a BBN (Uusitalo 2007, Richards, Sano et al. 2012). BBN modelling also
provides a mechanism, via the underlying probabilistic framework of Bayes
theorem, to integrate social, economic and environmental variables within a
single model (Kjaerulff and Madsen 2008). In terms of evaluating the
relationships between the impacts of a ten-fold increase in aquaculture
production and socially driven adaptation to the consequences thereof, this
attribute enables the variables that represent system determinants or stressors
(e.g. the 7 pre-determined stressors) to be linked emphatically with other
variables (e.g. adaptive capacity, political will).

Variables are objects, elements or attributes that can change e.g. temperature is a variable because it has
different values; the colour of a car (red, green, white etc) is another example of a variable.
4

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

The framework for developing the BBNs was presented to the workshop
participants. As a group, they were first instructed to assign two (dichotomous)
states to their priority issue, Infrastructure in the case of the local enthusiasts
for instance, as a means of discretising this variable. The workshop facilitator
guided the participants on the selection of these states including informing them
that they had to be discrete states (as opposed to continuous), mutually exclusive
(only one state can be true at any given time) and that the states be exhaustive (all
potential outcomes are covered by the states). These rules are fundamental tenets
of BBN development (Marcot, Steventon et al. 2006) although the selection of
dichotomous states entails that these are often broad qualitative descriptions.
Conversely, restriction to dichotomous states enhances the tractability of the
associated conditional probability tables (described elsewhere), which can
otherwise be a serious impediment in BBNs that rely heavily on expert elicitation
to parameterize them (Kjaerulff and Madsen 2008).
Further guidance on the selection of the dichotomous states was
provided in that they should reflect a desirable and undesirable state respectively.
Often, the stakeholders select states of high and low or good and bad
for the variable. In the example of Infrastructure development, the states
chosen were realistic and not realistic with reference to a ten-fold increase in
production. In the next step of the BBN development process, the stakeholders
were asked to identify three primary variables that would directly influence their
capacity to manage their priority issue at their desirable state (i.e. Infrastructure
developments = realistic). The priority issue and the three primary variables
along with their respective states were then put up on colored post-it notes on
the board, so that the stakeholders at all times could see what they were deciding
upon in unison. This was helpful when the second level of causality (secondary
variables) in the developing BBN diagram was created. This process required that
they assign up to three variables for each of the three primary variables, based on
the concept that these secondary variables directly influenced the primary
variables. The participants assigned dichotomous states to each of the secondary
variables in a similar manner as for the priority issue and the primary level
variables (figure 3).

76

Consilience

Figure 3: Bayesian Belief Network development example from workshop. The

priority issue is on top. A co-researcher is filling this out in a table format in MS
Word (or equivalent) at the same time, creating Conditional Probability Tables
for filling out individual probabilities of scenarios.
As introduced earlier, the CPTs quantify the strength of the relationships
between the variables in a BBN. Consequently, a CPT is required for each
variable (also termed the child node in BBN nomenclature) that is directly
influenced by at least one other variable (also termed a parent node). In the BBN
developed using the approach outlined here, four CPTs are required. Populating
the CPT was achieved here by assigning the probabilities of observing particular
outcomes for a child variable given a combination of states (a BBN scenario) for
the parent(s) variables that directly influence it (i.e. a conditional probability).
We used the expert opinions of the different stakeholders to provide these
probabilities - this process was carried out with each stakeholder individually at
the conclusion of the workshop. Table 1 shows an example of a populated CPT
of the BBN developed during the workshop as was presented to each
stakeholder. Each row represents a different combination of the different parent
variables involved (scenarios) and all combinations are shown.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Table 1 An example of a populated conditional probability table from the
Foreign Workers. Stakeholders provide the %s by going through the scenarios
and responding to the question What is the percentage probability (0-100%) that
Your Language Learning will be so good, it will make you FLUENT in
Norwegian for the following 8 scenarios?
Local
Community
speaking
Norwegian with
you

Course Offerings

Actively
Interested

Flexible

Actively
Interested

Flexible

Actively
Interested

NOTE Flexible

Actively
Interested

NOTE Flexible

NOT Actively
Interested

Flexible

NOT Actively
Interested

Flexible

5NOT Actively
Interested

NOTE Flexible

NOT Actively
Interested

NOTE Flexible

Teaching
Quality and
Method
Adaptable at the
individual level
NOT Adaptable
at the individual
level
Adaptable at the
individual level
NOT Adaptable
at the individual
level
Adaptable at the
individual level
NOT Adaptable
at the individual
level
Adaptable at the
individual level
NOT Adaptable
at the individual
level

Probability in % of
your language
learning being so
good, you will be
able to learn fluent
Norwegian from 0100.
100%
60%
80%
10%
80%
10%
20%
0%

Through this process, the CPTs required to parameterize the BBNs were
provided by individual stakeholders. These probability tables were then
combined into a single BBN model through the inclusion of an auxiliary variable
(called 'Stakeholders') that represents the weighted input of each stakeholder
(Kjaerulff and Madsen 2008). In our study, each stakeholder was weighted
equally entailing that the opinions of each of the stakeholders were viewed as
equal. The secondary variables, which had no other variables influencing them in
the BBN (also termed stem nodes), were assigned probabilities of 50% for each
of the two states.

3.1 Workshops
The aim of the five stakeholder driven workshops was to look at the adaptive
capacity of a local community to eutrophication from aquaculture, with a ten-fold
increase in aquaculture development being a proxy for eutrophication. The only

78

Consilience

workshop not held on the island group of Frya itself was the scientist
workshop, which was held at the Norwegian University of Science and
Technology (NTNU), for the purposes of getting a more detached view. The
workshops all followed the same method described above, and started with
Systems Thinking group conceptualization efforts, followed by a BBN session,
where the priority issue, as identified in the first part of the workshops using
Vensim, was explored further, and from which Conditional Probability Tables
were created for individual reporting to add to the group element of the
methodology. The BBN-development process also facilitated the capture of
further information through the discussions that accompanied the development
of these networks. This narrative would further contextualize the importance of
different variables, whether the narrative was occurring within a group
environment (e.g. during the development of the BBN structure) or individually
(e.g. during the population of the CPTs). During the development of a BBN
structure, for instance, the stakeholders would invariably negotiate or discuss
what variables were more or less important in implementing their adaptation
option (i.e. identification of the primary-level variables), giving the variables and
CPTs greater meaning. The following is an overview of the systems thinking and
narratives of the four different stakeholder groups, leading up to their priority
issues.

3.2 Scientists
The ten scientists that took part in the workshop, looking at possible
consequences of a ten-fold increase in aquaculture production for the local
community of Frya, represented a variety of field of studies, including marine
chemistry, political science, economy, ecosystem modelling, philosophy, biology
and marine technology as well as representatives from SINTEF fisheries and
aquaculture. They were recruited through the Marine Coastal Development
program at NTNU, and attended voluntarily based on information in an
introductory email explaining the project. Their remoteness from the local
population at Frya coupled with their diverse aquaculture expertise gave the
group a unique angle from which to view the hypothesized ten-fold increase in
aquaculture production and the effects this would have on the local population in
a small coastal community, most specifically Frya. Though their focus at first
was mainly technical, focusing first and foremost on general aspects of
aquaculture production and feed problems globally, it soon narrowed itself in on
the topic of the local community in and of itself. The discussion focused on
living, working and travelling to and from Frya for these purposes, with some
disagreement over whether or not Norwegians, especially highly educated ones,
would want to live on Frya or whether they would prefer to live in Trondheim.
Some even felt that the production would likely move off shore and that there
would be similar work conditions on aquaculture barges as the offshore oil
industry is experiencing today, where the location of ones home is of little
importance. The discussion finally settled on a if you build it, they will come
philosophy. This means, if there are jobs for two people in a family, good
schools, good infrastructure, opportunities, after-school activities and other
scenarios associated with Norwegian family welfare requirements, the highly
educated Norwegian families will come as well, and not just the foreigners. The
priority issue that was decided upon in the end was to take a broad look at this

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

ten-fold increase, and prioritize how this can have a positive effect on the local
community in general, and on Frya specifically.

3.3 High School Students Specializing in Aquaculture

This priority issue of the local community also resonated well for the high
school students specializing in the field of Aquaculture at Sistranda High School
in Frya, representatives of the future generation of the island community. All
the students in the class were present throughout the workshops, and the main
topics that came up were attached to problems associated with illness in the
salmon production industry. This included discussions on how the nets are being
perforated by cod eating through them, the nets rubbing onto rings made of steel
holding the construction together, and even perforations created by the illegal
fishing of tourists within the 100 meter zone surrounding the aquaculture
construction. The result of this is that the salmon can escape, and some spread
diseases to wild salmon and destroy their spawning territories there by. This was
all tied together with the quality off the salmon keepers on site, which was
another topic of great interest to this group of youth. Their focus on this,
naturally, was not surprising, given that their field of study would educate them
to become just that, salmon keepers. The quality of the aquaculture cages and
nets, the feeding process, and the conflicts with fishermen over aquaculture vs.
fishing areas were all topics that came back to the quality of the keepers on site.
Another topic of great interest to this youth at the local high school was the
future of the local community. There was no discussion surrounding the fact that
their community was growing. They did acknowledge, though, that some of this
growth was coupled with incomplete integration, given that the growth was based
on foreign immigrants working in lower waged jobs such as the salmon slaughter
and packing factory on the island and Norwegians not mingling with them. These
production jobs are jobs that Norwegians do not want, they proclaimed, and they
felt that this had led to the foreign immigrants sticking to themselves in smaller
groups rather than integrating themselves with those from the local community.
They nevertheless preferred this growth though, as it led to a community in
growth, better schools, more youth and a feeling that there was an actual future
there for them. This latter is also what ended up being their priority issue, namely
the development of their local community on the archipelago being positive.

3.4 Commercial Fishermen

Community development was important for the commercial fishermen as
well. Despite the fact that salmon farming has so far been the most successful
and commercialized species of the island community, traditional fisheries are still
seeking new possibilities for production and sales, which could save this industry
as well. They operate test-fishing licenses for new commercial species, and new
niches like whelk (sea-snail), sea cucumber and scallops and many believe these
new opportunities can be an important source of income in the future for this
group. During the season from May to December, fishermen in the area deliver
daily crab from the clear waters of the island region and in 2011 a total of 3.500
tons of edible crab was processed at HitraMat AS (Hitra Food Inc.). The
fishermen interviewed in this project naturally had a more focused priority area
with regards to aquaculture than the high school students though, given their

80

Consilience

choice of profession as business owners and their need to protect this business,
though they too, like the scientists and the students, had their local community in
Frya and the positive contribution of aquaculture to its development close at
heart and at focus in the discussion. The workshop even started with a caveat
that they did not want the workshop to say that they had any problems with the
aquaculture industry, because, they were, in fact,very happy with it. A total of five
fishermen, representing Norges Fiskarlag, a politically independent organization
that is built on voluntary membership, participated in the workshop that were to
represent the views of the Frya fishermen with regards to aquaculture expansion
in the area. Norges Fiskarlag was established in 1926 to safeguard the collective
interests of the Norwegian capture fishermen, and it is the largest fisheries
organization in Norway, with some 7000 members. It consists of eight local
chapters spread along county lines, as well as two group organizations (Sr-Norges
Notfiskarlag and Fiskebtredernes Forbund). Members are both coastal fishermen
with small smacks, as well as the crew of ocean-going trawlers, thereby ensuring a
broad and encompassing membership base, and the group taking part in the
participatory workshop represented the same mix of fishing vessels.
Though their priority issue later ended up focusing on the expected topics
of their business surviving, the main topic in this participatory workshop was at
first how the fishermen felt they were actually not at all affected by problems
associated with the salmon aquaculture industry. This was a completely different
narrative from similar participatory workshops with commercial fishermen
considering aquaculture in Central California (Tiller, Gentry et al. 2013), where
the antagonism against another business competitor to limited coastal areas were
adamant. The commercial fishermen in Frya were clear, however, that they were
absolutely in favour of aquaculture on the archipelago, and that there were no
conflicts between the industries. The island group had been revitalized by the
salmon industry, and they claimed no commercial fishermen had suffered job
losses as a consequence of this industry expanding. They emphasized that rather
than taking jobs away from commercial fishermen, the industry had actually given
rise to an increase in other related industries that were positive for all sectors, as
well as new school offerings such as the commercial fishermen major at the local
high school. After a while, however, once they had spoken on the topic for a
while, they did seem to agree that the commercial fishing industry could in fact
suffer, and be downsized substantially because of the competition from
aquaculture in fact they even agreed that the industry could become obsolete
because of not only the salmon industry but also other farmed marine species
that demand large areas that currently are in use by the commercial fishing
industry. The culmination of the discussion was that the financial aspects trump
all others. There are clear overlaps between aquaculture localities and spawning
areas for commercial fish species, with the former being prioritized, mainly
because the decision making process has been moved from the local municipality
to the more centralized political entity of the county, which consists of a group of
municipalities and is geographically removed from the municipalities in question.
The growth potential for the commercial fishing industry on Frya is therefore
less certain than that of the aquaculture industry, which worried the fishers some,
and led to their priority issue being the survival of the capture fisher industry.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

3.5 Local Enthusiasts

In line with the other stakeholder groups, but with a more concrete
priority issue than just a positive development of their community, were the local
enthusiasts on Frya, who were selected using the snowball method as well
(Snijders 1992). The group of seven were represented by both men and women;
local politicians from both the far right, left and middle; industry representatives
and board members; educational leaders; historians; local enthusiast- and cultural
price winners; as well as municipality advisors many of whom held several of
these titles. The first element this group brought up with regards to aquaculture,
beyond sheer enthusiasm for all the benefits thereof, was that the main group
that had raised any kind of objection to the effects of aquaculture were those that
did not live on the archipelago permanently, namely second home owners. This
was a group that would complain about visual contamination of the area, such as
nets being driven on shore, or lights on the water at night. The group was clearly
irritated about these objections from the second-home owners, and clearly stated
that the concerns of the main population that actually lived on the islands
permanently were those that were prioritized, even if everybody had the right to
state their opinions at hearings about new and current aquaculture localities.
What was a concern for this group, however, was the increased traffic to
the archipelago as a result of the increase in aquaculture production and how this
would only get worse if the hypothesized 10-fold increase were to come true.
Even if the future increase in road traffic is diluted by an immense increase in
traffic by sea instead, the traffic was hypothesized by the group to at least double
regardless, which would be intolerable, even at that rate given the current
problems they had with infrastructure at todays rate. They felt though, that even
if this was negative, the salmon industry had provided for lights on the island
group, which was the critical factor. The local high school had had an enormous
increase in applicants to both the aquaculture and the commercial fisheries
majors, with the former having had an increase from 1 applicant in 2007 to 32
applicants in 2013 and around 85% of all the students actually stay on Frya after
the end of their education. The largest problem with this increase, in addition to
infrastructure, was the lack of qualified applications that were needed to fill
teaching positions, which could not be resolved with the increasing immigrant
population.
With 15% of the population of the archipelago not being Norwegian,
they did concede some societal as well as logistical problems despite all the
positive association they had with aquaculture. In 2010, the birth rate of children
with immigrant parents on the island was significant, at 41%, which was reflected
in the day care situation on the island as well, where at least one day care reports
the ratio of foreign children that do not speak Norwegian being at 70%, and only
13 % being Norwegian (Strmy 2012). They felt the integration at the high
school went well, however, though they did acknowledge having observed that
the foreign students mostly kept to themselves during breaks, something which
was acknowledged by the high school stakeholder group as well. They also
commented on having read about loneliness among the foreign youth (Strmy
2013), and decided that language was the biggest challenge to the integration
process on the archipelago. Given that these immigrants are on the island group
voluntarily for work purposes, they have no rights to Norwegian language
education, as refugees do (New in Norway 2013). They therefore have to learn

82

Consilience

the language voluntarily, which often hinders their social integration. By the end
of 2012, however, the local government on Frya decided to go into a dialogue
with SalMar, where the official work language is Norwegian, about joint language
training for foreign workers to ease integration of these groups into the society
(Frya Kommune 2012, Strmy 2012).
Moving away from foreign immigrants, however, the group fast
reapproached infrastructure as its main issue of concern, with the lack of boat
communication being a large problem in addition to the roads not being prepared
for the kind of traffic they were experiencing nowadays, and would in the future.
The main issue was because they wanted not only foreign workers to come move
to Frya they also wanted Norwegians, which was in line with what the
scientists had suggested as well in their workshop. The local enthusiasts felt that
there ought to be no more than 1,5 hours to Trondheim either by boat or by
road for it to be possible to tempt people in the Trondheims region to make
the move to the archipelago Frya. Another wished for option was a max half
hour boat route to rlandet, where the main air station for the Royal Norwegian
Air Force was recently relocated (The Storting 2012), which would provide job
opportunities for two income families where one could conveniently work in
Frya. Infrastructure expansion and planning thus became the main priority issue
for this stakeholder group, which was reflected in the development of the future
scenarios in the second part of the workshop.

3.6 Foreign Workers

Finally, the last workshop consisted of the group whose role in the
society was a sub-factor in all the workshops, namely representatives of the
foreign workers in the salmon industry on the archipelago. This proved to be a
distinctive group, composed of variety of immigrants, a group that is currently
relatively marginalized in this local community. This group will soon make up
20% of the population of Frya but few of these immigrants speak any
Norwegian. They are employed in relatively low-skilled, low prestige jobs,
particularly in the processing of salmon. These workers are, however, critically
important to the future of the industry since the local authorities and employers
have been unable to attract Norwegian workers to these jobs. The survival of the
industry and the health of the local communities therefore depend on
understanding the needs of this group. The workshop clearly indicated that the
priority of these stakeholders was inclusion in society. The foreign workers did
not want to be on the outskirts of society any more whether there was a tenfold increase in aquaculture production or not. They felt that their lack of
language skills was inhibiting their ability to move across sectors, to be integrated
in the local community, and to have upwards motion in their careers. They
therefore almost immediately changed most of the drivers away from
environmental factors to more social factors. What this group wanted was for the
local Norwegian community to recognize their need to have training in speaking
Norwegian in a natural setting. They wanted their fellow island inhabitants to
actively help them in their effort to learn Norwegian; they wanted the
Norwegians to correct their language respectfully when they said something
wrong and to explain the correct way of saying the sentence. They felt that it is
currently us (the foreign workers) versus them (the Norwegians), and they
felt that the salmon industry management looked down upon them. These

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

workers also perceived that they were stuck in both the company where they
worked and in Frya because of their lack of integration and Norwegian skills.
This lack of upward mobility options was a great source of frustration and led to
lack of interest on the part of many in staying in Norway, and instead dreaming
of returning home to their respective home countries.

4. Results
Four of the stakeholder groups were located in Frya, and thus had the
same frame of reference with regards to their local community and the changes
they had seen and were foreseeing therein. The fifth stakeholder group consisted
of experts in the field of aquaculture in general, specifically from a scientific and
technological point of view. After the initial part of the workshop, where the
group conceptualization process explored and unearthed the priority issue of the
given stakeholder group, and the BBN development created the causal links
leading to this priority issue, conditional probability tables (CPT) were given to
the participants to fill out. The data elicited from the participants were used to
construct and compile functioning BBNs using the dedicated Bayesian software
package Netica using these tables. Auxiliary expert variables were introduced to
each of the BBNs (Kjrulff and Madsen, 2007). These auxiliary variables were
specified for every child variable within the BBN structure with the contribution
of each stakeholders CPT weighted equally. The goal was to have the
participants create quantitative future scenarios, where they would come up with
their user groups priority issue given the prerequisite scenario of an imagined
ten-fold increase. The background for wanting this information was to ascertain a
priori what the conflict lines could be in the future for these user groups, and
provide a management tool to that would better prepare local and national policy
makers to the potential conflict lines that may emerge. The following are
graphical representations of the BBNs for the five different workshops. For the
purposes of easing the readers understanding of the networks, an in depth
explanation of how these work will be presented first. Each stakeholder group
was first instructed to assign two (dichotomous) states to their priority issue as a
means of discretizing this variable. The priority issues are stated in table 2.
Table 2: Priority issue in each workshop
Workshop
Priority issue
Scientists NTNU
Positive effect on local community
Local Enthusiasts
Realistic infrastructure
Commercial Fishermen
Existence of a commercial fishery on
Frya
Future Generations (High School
Positive development of local
Students)
community
Foreign Workers in Salmon Industry
Learning to speak Norwegian
adequately
The workshop facilitator guided the participants on the selection of these
states including informing them that they had to be discrete states (as opposed to
continuous), mutually exclusive (only one state can be true at any given time) and
that the states be exhaustive (all potential outcomes are covered by the states).

84

Consilience

These rules are fundamental tenets of BBN development (Marcot,
Steventon et al. 2006) although the selection of dichotomous states entails that
these are often broad qualitative descriptions. Conversely, restriction to
dichotomous states enhances the tractability of the associated conditional
probability tables (described elsewhere), which can otherwise be a serious
impediment in BBNs that rely heavily on expert elicitation to parameterize them
(Kjaerulff and Madsen 2008).
Further guidance on the selection of the dichotomous states was provided in
that the stakeholders were instructed to reflect on a desirable and undesirable
state respectively. In the next step of the BBN development process, the
stakeholders were asked to identify three primary variables that would directly
influence their capacity to manage their priority issue at their desirable state. After
some group discussion, the participants agreed upon three primary variables
(dichotomous states were assigned as per the priority issue (see the BBN figures
under each heading under). The priority issue and the three primary variables and
states were then put up on colored post-it notes on the board during the
workshop, so that the stakeholders at all times could see what they were deciding
upon in unison. This was helpful when the second level of causality (secondary
variables) in the developing BBN diagram was created. This process required that
they assign up to three variables for each of the three primary variables, based on
the concept that these secondary variables directly influenced the primary
variables. Again, they were prompted to assign percentage influences that these
secondary variables would have on the primary variables. The participants
assigned dichotomous states to each of the secondary variables in a similar
manner as for the priority issue and the primary level variables. The priority issue
and the primary variables (the first and second levels of the pyramid) were the
basis for the scenarios produced (see example in Table 1) where the stakeholders
then assigned individual probabilities for each scenario being realized. In the
figures below, the results of those probabilities have been added to Netica, and
the group results are presented.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Stakeholder
Stakeholder1
14.3
Stakeholder2
14.3
Stakeholder3
14.3
Stakeholder4
14.3
Stakeholder5
14.3
Stakeholder6
14.3
Stakeholder7
14.3

Integration of Local Community with Newc...

High
57.5
Low
42.5

Nationality of Newcommers
National
50.0
International
50.0

Family State
Married
50.0
Unmarried
50.0

Language Skills of Newcommers

Norwegian
50.0
Others
50.0

Effect on Local Community

Positive
57.8
Negative
42.2

Effect on Local Development

Positive
62.9
Negative
37.1

Implementation and Management

Sustainable
53.9
Unsustainable
46.1

Government Investment in Local Community

High
50.0
Low
50.0

Effect on marine environment

Low
50.0
High
50.0

Effect on other users of ocean

Positive Neutral
50.0
Negative
50.0

Industry contribution to local community

High
50.0
Low
50.0

Tax to local community

High
50.0
Low
50.0

Integration of Aquaculture Industry with Ot...

Strong
50.0
Weak
50.0

Figure 4 BBN Scientist Workshop red is most influential pathway, blue is

next.
The scientists had chosen to have as their priority issue, given the
instructions from the research team, the need for a positive effect of a tenfold
increase in aquaculture production on the local community of Frya specifically,
but also more generally, given that there are many Fryas in Norway. They had
a very positive outlook of this, given the results of their conditional probability
tables, and all in all, of the 7/10 participants that did fill out the forms after the
workshop (3 had to leave early and never filled these out though participated in
the workshop), the results showed that they anticipated that with a ten fold
increase in aquaculture production, there was a 57.8% chance it would have a
positive effect on the local community. This was under the caveat of the
production being sustainable, however, with little negative effect on other user
groups or the marine environment, and a strong integration between the industry
and other sectors in the community. With this lacking, this positive outlook
would shrink to only 39% certainty of a positive effect. A low integration, set at
100%, of newcomers to the community was deemed less important, however,
though it did make the outlook fall right under 50%. Similarly with
environmental sustainability, the third scenario looking at local development, also
suffered if the effect on local development was set to 100% negative, making the
prediction of positive effects fall to 38.4%. What the initial conditional
probability tables show, however, is that the scientists as a group appear
convinced that the effect on local development, with 62.9% certainty, will be
positive. Based on the narratives from the workshop itself, these results are not
surprising. The workshop consisted of scientists with a dedication to aquaculture
as a field of specialization, and they were in general very positive to the industry
in general and less focused on the environmental aspects that could negatively
have an effect on a coastal community. They saw the benefits of this industry as
being more prominent than any potential negativity, which was again reflected in
their output. Though, as observed in the BBN, the variable with the highest
chance of changing the positive outlook was still those that related directly to
sustainability of the industry. When doing the sensitivity analysis of the BBN, we
found that the Implementation and Management node is most influential on the
priority node and is mainly driven by the effect on marine environment (unsurprisingly
for scientists!). The effect on local development is also important and the main
determinant acting on this is the industry contribution to local community. Integration of

86

Consilience

local community is a weak determinant and this is reflected in the sensitivity analysis
with all three parent nodes (family state; language skills; nationality) the three bottom
ranked nodes. Similar to the fishermen, there is a strong stakeholder effect but
there is not clear divergence in which nodes are the most influential. This
suggests differences in the conditional probabilities but not in the sentiment (or
perception) about which are the important nodes in the BBN.

Stakeholder
Stakeholder1
11.1
Stakeholder2
11.1
Stakeholder3
11.1
Stakeholder4
11.1
Stakeholder5
11.1
Stakeholder6
11.1
Stakeholder7
11.1
Stakeholder8
11.1
Stakeholder9
11.1

Development of Local Community

Positive
55.7
Negative
44.3

Educational Opportunities K-12

Exists
57.8
Does not exist
42.2

Labor Market/Access to Work

Sufficient
57.4
Insufficient
42.6

Employment Opportunities
Local
50.0
Not local
50.0
Places to work
Exist
50.0
Do not exist 50.0

Opportunity to earn wages

Exist
50.0
Do not exist 50.0

Teachers
Experienced
50.0
Inexperiences
50.0

Number of Inhabitants in the Community

Sufficient
58.5
Insufficient
41.5

Homes in community
Accessible
50.0
No access to homes
50.0

Quality of Students
Engaged
50.0
Passive
50.0

Perception of Nature in Community

Nice and Clean
50.0
Trashy and ugly
50.0

Leisure Activities in Community

Good
50.0
Bad
50.0

Attractiveness of Schools
Attractive
50.0
Not attractive
50.0

Figure 5 BBN Future Generations. Variables in red rectangles highlight most

influential path, blue indicates second most influential path.
Labor market/Access to Work was the most influential determinant acting
on the priority node (Development of Local Community) for the local high school
students on Frya. In turn, this (Labor market/Access to Work) was almost equally
sensitive to its three parent nodes (places to work, employment opportunities, opportunity
to earn wages) showing how the students felt that it was critical not only that there
were jobs on the island for them in the future, but also that they were local and
that they had the opportunity to earn good wages. The second most influential
pathway was via the Teachers and Educational Opportunities, demonstrating the
actual importance young high school students place on the experience of their
teachers and mentors. Note that the auxiliary variable representing the
stakeholder beliefs (stakeholder) was also influential, emerging as second only to
Labor market/Access to Work. This indicates a divergence in the conditional
probabilities assigned by the nine stakeholders. There does seem to be some
convergence about the importance of the labor market/access to work among
the nine stakeholders, although there is divergence in whether employment
opportunities, places to work or opportunity to earn wages is more important.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Commercial Fishery in Frya
Exists
45.3
Does not exist 54.7

Stakeholders: Commercial Fishermen

Stakeholder1
20.0
Stakeholder2
20.0
Stakeholder3
20.0
Stakeholder4
20.0
Stakeholder5
20.0

Commercial Fishermen Workforce exists

Yes
51.8
No
48.2

Area set aside for Aquaculture

Lots
50.1
Little
49.9

Regulatory power of Municipality

Powerful
50.0
Not powerful
50.0

General taxation on fisheries

Predictable
50.0
Unpredictable
50.0

Commercial Fisheries
Politically prioritized
50.0
Not politically prioritized
50.0

Type of Aquacultured species

Not area demanding
50.0
Area demanding
50.0

Profitability of Commercial Fishing

Good
50.1
Bad
49.9

Fishermen Reputation
Good
50.0
Bad
50.0

Combination of Salary and Leisure time

Competitive
50.0
Not competitive
50.0

Market price for wild fish

High
50.0
Low
50.0

Operating Cost for Fisheries

High
50.0
Low
50.0

Fishermen Education
Political priority
50.0
Not a political priority 50.0

Figure 6 BBN Commercial Fishermen. Variables in red rectangles highlight

most influential path, blue indicates second most influential path.
The importance of work and salary also is evident among the fishermen
on Frya. During the sensitivity analysis it was found that Profitability of Commercial
Fishing is easily the most influential node in this network and this is
predominantly influenced by the Market price for wild fish. The stakeholders actually
perceived the other two parent nodes for Profitability (i.e. taxation and operating
costs) as having quite low influence on profitability, which is understood more
clearly when the narrative of the workshop is taken into account. One of the
participants was a large-scale business owner with several employees and large
costs, and was very set on the critical importance of predictability, given the high
costs unpredictability would inflict upon his company. The others were smallscale boat owners and were not equally sensitive to these fluctuations. However,
this also demonstrates the flexibility of this system in that it captures what the
majority actually felt, discarding what dominant stakeholders in a workshop
setting may overlook. The next main pathway of influence is through the node
Commercial fishermen workforce exists, although the sensitivity analysis indicates this
is a lot less influential than profit, which is not surprising giving that these are
business owners and are representing an industry as such. The main influence on
workforce exists is salary-leisure although fishermen reputation is also important. The area
set aside for aquaculture is a minor determinant judging by the sensitivity analysis
although out of its three parent nodes, the type of aquaculture species is the important
one (the politics and municipality themed nodes are very weak in terms of
influence). The narrative shows that this is because of a perceived threat they
have of future kelp aquaculture developments on the island, something which
they perceived to be much more space needing than the aquaculture industry,
thus forcing them further out of their fishing areas. Lastly, stakeholder, as a
variable, has considerable influence on the priority node indicating some degree
of divergence between the beliefs of the stakeholders themselves. However,
looking at the outcomes of the sensitivity analysis, it would seem that this
variability probably reflects more the difference in the actual probabilities
assigned but does not reflect the underlying sentiment (e.g. two stakeholders
share a belief in which parent node is more important but use different
probabilities to reflect this).

88

Consilience

Stakeholders
stake1
16.7
stake2
16.7
stake3
16.7
stake4
16.7
stake5
16.7
stake6
16.7

Infrastructure
Realistic
47.0
Unrealistic
53.0

Global marketing of Frya food production

Positive
45.9
Negative
54.1

Will
No will

Financing
54.1
45.9

Long term mental understanding

Reputation of marine sector

Political priority
50.0
Not political priority 50.0

Awareness
Not awareness

Department of Aquaculture
Exists
50.0
Does not exist 50.0

58.3
41.7

Accepted Environmental reputation

Sustainable
50.0
Unsustainable
50.0
Industry action towards reputation building
Proactive
50.0
Reticent
50.0

Integrated Costal Zone Management

Postive
50.0
Negative
50.0

Local enthusiasts
strong will
weak will

50.0
50.0

Political priority
Yes
No

50.0
50.0

Research
Locally based
Remote base

50.0
50.0

Situation of Patriotic Capitalists

Economic advantages
50.0
No advantage
50.0

Figure 7 BBN Local Enthusiasts.

The local enthusiasts chose to be more specific in their quest for a
priority issue and the path towards it. Rather than focusing on the positive effects
on the local community, which they took as more of a given, and focused instead
on how to prepare the community for all these positive effects, namely through
realistic infrastructure investments that would take into account this tenfold
increase in production on Frya. Based on the six stakeholders conditional
probability tables, the initial joint results were not entirely positive, with a
likelihood of only 47% of Infrastructure being realistic relative to the needs of
the community. With Global Marketing of Frya Food Production being
manipulated to 100% positive, however, this changed to 62.2%. Similarly, with a
Will to Finance set at 100%, it changed to 62.6%. Despite the heavy emphasis
of the group on the importance of Long term mental understanding which
meant that the stakeholders felt the global community needed to change its
mentality about farmed marine products from the bottom up, at the local
community, this variable nevertheless did not change much, even when set at
100% at which it only reaches 55% chance of infrastructure being realistic.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

ForeignWorkers
Stakeholder1
16.7
Stakeholder2
16.7
Stakeholder3
16.7
Stakeholder4
16.7
Stakeholder5
16.7
Stakeholder6
16.7

Language Learning
FluentNorwegian
NOTfluent

Local Community
ActivelyInterested
49.2
NOTactivelyinterested
50.8

Courses
Flexible
NotFlexible

47.7
52.3

Teaching Quality and Methods

Adaptive to individual level
NOT adaptive

51.3
48.7

Community understanding of wishes

Local Interest
Exists
Does not exist

45.9
54.1

Better than today

Same as today

50.0
50.0

50.0
50.0

Committment from Company

Real
50.0
Not so real
50.0

Local knowledge of this need

PublicInformationEvent
NOpublicinfoevent

50.0
50.0

Individual level teaching

Location of the course

Easily reachable
Difficult to reach

Teacher quality
Inclusive and understanding 50.0
Not inclusive n understanding 50.0

Exists
Does not exist

50.0
50.0

50.0
50.0

Course Offerings
Many and diverse
Few and same

50.0
50.0

Schedule of course offerings

Great variation
Little variation

50.0
50.0

Figure 8 Foreign Workers in the Salmon industry

The foreign workers, as opposed to the other groups, were not as
concerned about the local community per se but of their role within it. They
chose as their priority issue being able to speak fluent Norwegian (Language
Learning), and what what variables they felt were influential in reaching this end.
The initial results showed that, based on the individual probabilities, the
participants felt it was almost a 46% chance of them becoming fluent in
Norwegian. The most influential variable for them was Teaching Quality and
Methods. In turn, the sensitivity analysis (above Table) indicates that
Commitment from Company is the most influential determinant (of Teaching
Quality and Methods) and therefore the most influential pathway to the priority
node is via these two variables (as indicated by the red nodes in the diagram
below). This variable (commitment from company) rests on their view that the
commitment from the company to not schedule them for mandatory work or
overtime when there was a course that they needed to go to had to be real.
Although not entirely logical, this was clearly the most important factor for them,
Naturally, the adaptive capacity of teaching methods is not related to, or affected
by, whether or not a workplace will schedule someone for work in the same
period. The two other variables affecting Teaching Quality and Methods are,
however, but these were not equally important to the participants. This showed
that in addition to their need for good teachers, they had an underlying
assumption that there had to be a real commitment from the company to let
them learn fluent Norwegian on their own time and according to their own
schedule, and without the company demanding work over language. There is
general cohesion about which nodes are the most important and which are least
important among the stakeholders too. Four out of the six stakeholders placed
Teaching quality and Method as the most important variable influencing the
priority node. Furthermore, five of the stakeholders placed Commitment from
the company as the most important node influencing Teaching quality and
Methods. The main divergence from this pattern was stakeholder 6, who
appeared to place greater on Local Community (and Local Interest).
Based on the sensitivity analysis, the second most influential node is
Courses. At the next hierarchical level (i.e. the parent nodes for Courses),

90

Consilience

Course Offerings is the most influential with the remaining two parent nodes
having similar (but lower) influence. This second-most influential pathway is
shown in blue in the following BBN. There is more variability (or divergence)
regarding the second-most important node influencing the priority node, which
was split between Courses and Local Community. The greater influence given
to Courses in the group-level sensitivity analysis appears to be a result of more
widespread probabilities assigned to the effect of Courses (i.e. the impact of
whether these were flexible or not) and the low importance assigned by one of
the stakeholders (Stakeholder 4).

6. Conclusion
The implications of the findings of these workshops to policy makers are
many, both at the local, regional and national scale. Policy makers are constantly
faced with both the interests of new investments that could provide job
opportunities and increase seafood production, and also existing constituents,
including stakeholders with different levels of power and influence over policy
decisions. It has been argued that stakeholders should play a large role in
determining public policy in a given area. This is because it facilitates legitimacy
in the process for the stakeholders, greater satisfaction and often more innovative
solutions (Gopnik, Fieseler et al. 2012). Policy makers a priori knowledge of
these variables can lessen conflicts that may arise as a result of stakeholder
discontent with top-down approaches to aquaculture management, and give
managers a better understanding about what they propose could have negative
repercussions with stakeholder groups. It can also bring a legitimizing aspect to
the political process for affected stakeholder groups, possibly lessening
simmering conflicts.
In light of this, the article has explored the socio-ecological effects of a
ten-fold increase in aquaculture production through the granting of new licenses
to the industry around the island group of Frya in Trndelag, Norway. This was
investigated from a stakeholder perspective, assessing the adaptive capacity of the
local community Frya in the middle part of Norway to a ten-fold increase in
aquaculture production. This was done through participatory stakeholder
workshops combining Scenario Analysis, Systems Thinking and Bayesian Belief
Networks, where we developed conceptual frameworks and influence diagrams
visualizing the perceived effects of the industry on the given stakeholder system.
This adaptive capacity is, even in its raw state, an important tool for policy
makers to explore the effects local communities foresee with de facto industry
expansion. This can then provide context-specific adaptation policies and
measures that can be pursued that reduce a given stakeholder groups
vulnerability to negative consequences of industry expansion.
A few assumptions were proven wrong in this project. Beforehand, it was
expected that the challenges of integrating an increasing number of foreign
immigrants into the small island community would be a priority issue for many of
the stakeholder groups. We also expected income to be a priority issue for
commercial fishermen, and that environmental issues would be of big importance
to the stakeholders. However, we were surprised by the results, especially since
there was an apparent lack of conflict over even something as dramatic as a
tenfold increase in aquaculture production in the relatively small geographical

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

area of the archipelago of Frya in Norway, even in light of known
environmental effects and displacement of other user groups and how much
more integration need would result from it. The survival of the island community
was that which was of utmost importance in these communities, and with
expressed gratitude towards the industry saviours that were contributing to this
growth and the foreign immigrants that were contributing to it. Underlying all
this positivism, however, is the fact that there are definite integration issues
prevalent in the community that now has near 20% foreign inhabitants, and
where day-care centres can have upwards of 70% non-Norwegian speaking
children attending. If you build it, they will come was resonated in the
workshops, with a reference to native Norwegians, not foreign workers, and that
an increase in population as a result of a tenfold increase in production could as
easily be filled with Norwegian migrants as foreign ones, if only the infrastructure
challenges, as relates to the necessity of two jobs per family, could be overcome.
When exploring the other side of this issue, the foreign workers, we did find that
there were simmering conflicts where they felt marginalized on the outskirts of
society at times and wanted to be included. One worker summed it up nicely
when she said: if I could speak fluent Norwegian, and be part of society, I
would stay here forever! This is important information for the policy makers at
all levels of management to understand and to act upon before increasing licenses
for aquaculture in remote areas along the Norwegian coast. Unless you have a
workforce of Norwegians ready to fill the associated positions for these new
licenses, there needs to be critical work done in the language acquisition area so
that the foreign migrants that come to Norway are integrated properly and
become part of the population rather than transient workers.

92

Consilience

Bibliography
Abdallah, P. R. and U. R. Sumaila (2007). "An historical account of Brazilian
public policy on fisheries subsidies." Marine Policy 31(4): 444-450.
Antunes Zappes, C., et al. "The conflict between the southern right whale and
coastal fisheries on the southern coast of Brazil." Marine Policy(0).
BeLue, R., et al. (2012). "Systems Thinking Tools as Applied to CommunityBased Participatory Research: A Case Study." Health Education &
Behavior 39(6): 745-751.
Biernacki, P. and D. Waldorf (1981). "Snowball Sampling: Problems and
Techniques of Chain Referral Sampling." Sociological Methods &
Research 10(2): 141-163.
Botterhuis, L., et al. (2010). "Monitoring the future. Building an early warning
system for the Dutch Ministry of Justice." Futures 42(5): 454-465.
Christensen, P. (2013). Norwegian Fisheries- and Coastal History.
CIA (2011). "The World Factbook: Norway." Retrieved 29.06.2011, from
https://http://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/no.html.
Costello, M. J. (2009). "The global economic cost of sea lice to the salmonid
farming industry." Journal of Fish Diseases 32(1): 115-118.
De Jouvenel, H. (2000). "A Brief Methodological Guide to Scenario Building."
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 65(1): 37-48.
Dunlap, R. E. (2013). "Climate Change Skepticism and Denial: An Introduction."
American Behavioral Scientist.
Ervik, A., et al. (2007). Aquaculture Research: From Cage to Consumption.
Aquaculture Production of Aquatic Organisms (2000 2005). M. Thomassen,
R. Gudding, B. Norberg and L. Jrgensen. Oslo, The Fishery and Aquaculture
Research Fund (FHF).
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (2010). The State of World
Fisheries and Aquaculture 2010. The State of World: Fisheries and Aquaculture.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED
NATIONS. Rome.
FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (2010). The State of World
Fisheries and Aquaculture 2010.
http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i1820e/i1820e00.htm. Rome, Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department (2012). The State of World
Fisheries and Aquaculture 2012. The State of World: Fisheries and Aquaculture.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED
NATIONS. Rome.
Fisheries-Norway (2010). "The Norwegian Aquaculture Industry." Retrieved 18
may, 2012.
Flood, R. (2010). "The Relationship of Systems Thinking to Action Research."
Systemic Practice and Action Research 23(4): 269-284.
Frya Kommune (2012). 183/12 Norskopplring for Arbeidsinnvandrere
("Norwegain language learning for Work Immigrants"). Sistranda, Frya,
http://www.froya.kommune.no/getfile.aspx/document/epcx_id/1562/epdd_id
/2379.
Gopnik, M., et al. (2012). "Coming to the table: Early stakeholder engagement in
marine spatial planning." Marine Policy 36(5): 1139-1149.
Gould, H., Ed. (2011). Meteorology: Describing and Predicting the Weather
An Activity in Mathematical Modeling. The Journal of Mathematics Education at
Teachers College. New York, Program in Mathematics and Education at
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Graham, W., et al. (2003). "Ecological and economic implications of a tropical
jellyfish invader in the Gulf of Mexico." Biological Invasions 5(1-2): 53-69.
Gribbin, J. (1984). In Search of Schrdinger's Cat: Quantum Physics and Reality,
Bantam Books.
Hansen, H. and Y. Onozaka (2011). "When Diseases Hit Aquaculture: An
Experimental Study of Spillover Effects from Negative Publicity." Marine
Resource Economics 26(4): 281-291.
Helfrich, N. D. and W. Schade (2008). Bringing distributed software
development to SD modelling with vensim. The 2008 International Conference
of the System Dynamics Society, Athens, Greece, The Systems Dynamics
Society.
Henrion, M. (2013). Practical Issues in Constructing a Bayes' Belief Network.
Third Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI1987),
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/bib_query?arXiv:1304.2725.
Hugues, D. J. (2000). "A Brief Methodological Guide to Scenario Building."
Technological Forecasting and Social Change 65(1): 37-48.
Impson, S. (2011). "The blue food revolution." Scientific American 304(2): 54-61.

94

Consilience

Kalikoski, D. C., et al. (2010). "Building adaptive capacity to climate variability:
The case of artisanal fisheries in the estuary of the Patos Lagoon, Brazil." Marine
Policy 34(4): 742-751.
Kim, D.-H., et al. (2012). "Estimating the economic damage caused by jellyfish to
fisheries in Korea." Fisheries Science 78(5): 1147-1152.
Kjaerulff, U. B. and A. L. Madsen (2008). Bayesian networks and influence
diagrams: a guide to construction and analysis. Information Science and Statistics.
M. Jordan, J. Kleinberg and B. Scholkopf. New York, Springer.
Kjaerulff, U. B. and A. L. Madsen (2008). Bayesian Networks and Influence
Diagrams: A Guide to Construction and Analysis. New York, Springer.
Kristf, T. (2006). "Is it possible to make scientific forecasts in social sciences?"
Futures 38(5): 561-574.
Lan, T.-S., et al. (2013). "A Study of Developing a System Dynamics Model for
the Learning Effectiveness Evaluation." Mathematical Problems in Engineering
2013: 6.
Lena Brjeson, et al. (2006). "Scenario types and techniques: Towards a user's
guide." Futures 38(7): 723-739.
Lester, S. E., et al. (2010). "Science in support of ecosystem-based management
for the US West Coast and beyond." Biological Conservation 143(3): 576-587.
Lubchenco, J. and N. Sutley (2010). "Proposed U.S. Policy for Ocean, Coast, and
Great Lakes Stewardship." Science 328(5985): 1485-1486.
Marcot, B. G., et al. (2006). "Guidelines for developing and updating Bayesian
belief networks applied to ecological modeling and conservation." Canadian
Journal of Forest Research 36(12): 3063-3074.
Marine Stewardship Council (2012). "Fish as Food." 2013.
New in Norway (2013). "Norwegian language Courses." Retrieved March 25th,
2013.
Ostrom, E. (2009). "A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of SocialEcological Systems." Science 325(5939): 419-422.
Pauly, D. (2007). "The Sea Around Us Project: Documenting and
Communicating Global Fisheries Impacts on Marine Ecosystems."
AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 36(4): 290-295.
Pauly, D. (2008). "Global fisheries: a brief review." Journal of Biological
Research-Thessaloniki 9: 3-9.
Pedersen, H. (2006). Hva m vi gjre for sikre lys i husan? "What do we have to

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

do to ensure that homes have lights on?". Minister of Fisheries and
Coastal Affairs. Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs,
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fkd/Whats-new/Speeches-andarticles/minister/helga_pedersen/2006/hva-ma-vi-gjore-for-a-sikre-lys-ihusan.html?id=113908.
Philip van Notten (2006). Scenario development: a typology of approaches.
Think Scenarios, Rethink Education. OECD, OECD Publishing
Purcell, J. E. (2007). "Anthropogenic causes of jellyfish blooms and their direct
consequences for humans : a review." Marine Ecology Progress Series
350: 153-174.
Ray, H. (2011). "Future directions in ecosystem based fisheries management: A
personal perspective." Fisheries Research 108(23): 235-239.
Regjeringen Stoltenberg II (2005). "Plattform for regjeringssamarbeidet mellom
Arbeiderpartiet, Sosialistisk Venstreparti og Senterpartiet 2005-09."
Retrieved 12.03., 2007, from
http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/kilde/smk/rap/2005/0001/ddd/pdf
v/260512-regjeringsplatform.pdf.
Richards, R., et al. (2012). "Bayesian belief modeling of climate change impacts
for informing regional adaptation options." Environmental Modelling &
Software:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136481521200206X.
Richardson, A. J., et al. (2009). "The jellyfish joyride: causes, consequences and
management responses to a more gelatinous future." Trends in ecology &
evolution (Personal edition) 24(6): 312-322.
Rosamond L. Naylor, et al. (2000). "Effect of aquaculture on world fish
supplies." Nature 405: 1017-1024,
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v1405/n6790/pdf/4051017a40
51010.pdf.
Sandelowski, M. (1995). "Sample size in qualitative research." Research in
Nursing & Health 18(2): 179-183.
Slaughter, R. A. (1994). "Why we should care for future generations now."
Futures 26(10): 1077-1085.
Snijders, T. A. B. (1992). "Estimation On the Basis of Snowball Samples: How
To Weight?" Bulletin de Mthodologie Sociologique 36(1): 59-70.
Statistics Norway (2013). Population changes in the municipalities. Table: 06913:
Population 1 January and population changes during the calendar year
(M),
https://http://www.ssb.no/statistikkbanken/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?

96

Consilience

MainTable=Folkemengd1951&KortNavnWeb=folkendrhist&PLanguage
=1&checked=true.
Steven P Schnaars (1987). "How to develop and use scenarios." Long Range
Planning 20(1): 105-114.
Strmy, S. A. (2012). Alle snakker norsk p SalMar ("Everybody speaks
Norwegian at SalMar"). Frya.no:
http://www.froya.no/nyheter/alle_snakker_norsk_pa_salmar/.
Strmy, S. A. (2012). Innvandrernes barnehage ("The Immigrant Day Care").
Frya.no: http://www.froya.no/nyheter/innvandrernes_barnehage/.
Strmy, S. A. (2013). Innvandrerungdommen trives ikke ("The Immigrant
Youth are not happy on Frya"). Frya.no:
http://www.froya.no/nyheter/innvandrerungdommen_trives_ikke/.
The Storting (2012). Innstilling fra utenriks- og forsvarskomiteen om Et forsvar
for vr tid: Innst. 388 S (20112012). F.-a. D. Comittee.
http://www.stortinget.no/Global/pdf/Innstillinger/Stortinget/20112012/inns-201112-388.pdf.
Tiller, R., et al. (2012). "Norwegian aquaculture expansion and Integrated Coastal
Zone Management (ICZM): Simmering conflicts and competing claims."
Marine Policy 36(5): 1086-1095.
Tiller, R., et al. (2013). "Stakeholder driven future scenarios as an element of
interdisciplinary management tools; the case of future offshore
aquaculture development and the potential effects on fishermen in Santa
Barbara, California." Ocean & Coastal Management 73(0): 127-135.
Tiller, R. G. R. (2010). New resources in old waters : the potential of national and
international conflicts deriving from the future harvest of Calanus
finmarchicus Sociology and Political Science. Trondheim, Norwegian
University of Science
and Technology (NTNU). PhD.
Torrissen, O., et al. (2013). "Salmon lice impact on wild salmonids and salmon
aquaculture." Journal of Fish Diseases 36(3): 171-194.
Uusitalo, L. (2007). "Advantages and challenges of Bayesian networks in
environmental modelling." Ecological Modelling 203(34): 312-318.
Van auken, P. M. and J. Fredrik Rye (2011). "Amenities, Affluence, and Ideology:
Comparing Rural Restructuring Processes in the US and Norway."
Landscape Research 36(1): 63-84.
van Vliet, M., et al. (2010). "Linking stakeholders and modellers in scenario
studies: The use of Fuzzy Cognitive Maps as a communication and
learning tool." Futures 42(1): 1-14.

Consilience

Tiller et al.: Salmon Aquaculture

Webb, S. (2007). "Biochemistry: Gooey solution to a sticky problem." Science
News 172(2): 29-29.
Weible, C. M., et al. (2010). "Harnessing expert-based information for learning
and the sustainable management of complex socio-ecological systems."
Environmental Science & Policy 13(6): 522-534.
Worm, B., et al. (2006). "Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem
Services." Science 314(5800): 787-790.